Even the “they just need to survive and wait for competitors to fail and also somehow develop energy efficient autonomous cars” argument is completely ridiculous.
They have nowhere near the capital or capability to develop the driverless cars! So when those are invented (by someone else) and usable (in…5-10 years, maybe?) DoorDash will have very little to zero competitive advantage!
Just a complete dogshit company.
Well the idea is to be the consolidated player then use your market power to get restaurants on board with favorable contracts and take advantage of driverless cars, but obviously I agree with you. Like much of the market it is all very underpants gnomey.
The real play is just to get bought by Uber or someone for a dumb price before the music stops.
Oh, also driverless cars are scale like 20 years away and I may be very optimistic with that take.
What about goodwill?
Goodwill’s used food isn’t very good.
Goodwill is totally worthless.
Noted Social Scientist Charlie Munger has thoughts about the haters.
He’s confusing the masses with the poorest people whose inner lives he has any insight on - striving sycophantic millionaires who want to be billionaires.
Everyone hates them and has a miserable experience using them. Drivers, restaurants, and half the end users,
Their earnings were better than expected. From -0.45 to -0.25.
At this rate in a few years maybe they can break even and file for non-profit status!
Plus their model creates a disconnect on incentives for quality. When the driver works for the restaurant, it’s important to their direct boss that the order is right and that it arrives in good shape. When you start to add layers of separation, that quality decreases a ton.
Look up the prices on DoorDash, including all the fees. Then look up the prices on those restaurants actual menus. In many cases you’re paying 10-30% more per item in the order, plus the delivery fee, plus the tip. A $40 dinner for two from my local Thai place jumps to $52 plus the DoorDash fees, plus tip. You end up looking at $60-65. This is way worse than it was 6-12 months ago. I think restaurants are jacking up the Door Dash price to cover the fees on their end.
It blows my mind that they’re still losing money with these prices, and I think they are going to lose more and more customers due to inflation.
DoorDash offers one service: consolidating the food ordering process. That has no moat.
In theory they offer a delivery service, but it’s not actually working. And again, no real moat.
They suck at what they do and even if they get good at it and manage to turn a profit, the only thing they have going for them is brand name and restaurants loathe them and I bet they’re at best at 50-50 approve-disapprove among customers.
In a just world, @spidercrab ends up like Mark Baum at the end of The Big Short, sitting on his patio refusing to cover until the last minute as DoorDash goes to zero. But they’ll probably get bought up for pennies on the dollar.
Nah, everything is just overpriced and garbage like roblox gets hammered first.
after seeing all this buzz about the electric mustang, i’m disappointed to learn it’s an SUV
My next door neighbor has one and yeah it’s 100% not a coupe. Looks cool from my driveway to me though. It can do 3.5s 0-60 too.
I was actually considering getting one of these, but I heard that the battery life and range are sus.
Not stonks again? Pick a damn side SPY
I’d imagine it could cost people a lot of money if they were to average down and the market dropped to 2015 levels. Like, if the market returned to those levels, how many times is someone going to think nflx is a good buy before it drops to 80 or btc before it drops to 1,500.
I just bought ATVI (Activision Blizzard) at $81.075, at my standard allocation.
Microsoft entered into an agreement to buy them on 1/18 for $95 a share, which is expected to execute by 6/30/23. The stock was at $65 before the deal. If it falls through, without any fault from ATVI, MSFT will pay them $2B to $3B which amounts to $2.57 to $3.85 per share. So the floor if it falls through should be around $67.57 to $68.85 per share, which is more or less symmetrical downside versus the upside of the acquisition going through.
So it’ll return over 17%, plus there is an annual dividend with an ex-div date in April, so we’ll get one or two dividends. This year is 0.47 per share.
But commonWealth, how can this be a good deal? The hedges and institutional investors would surely be all over it, it’s a huge company! Efficient markets and all!
They are. Buffett/Berkshire has around 1.88% of the company, he got in before it was announced somewhere between $57 and $65 per share. BlackRock bought 7.9% at $79 after the deal was announced. Fidelity and Vanguard took big positions at $80-81 a share. Capital Group took a big position at $81.50 a share. Those five plus the CEO own 26% of the company. And those are just from the 13G’s filed since the announcement, with the exception of Buffett, which is how I found it.
So other big players may have already had a big chunk, or may not have bought enough to trigger a filing. They could own $3B of it without filing.
Unless you think the S&P is likely to do better than ~14% annual returns in the current climate, this is a +EV play.
The reasons it’s probably discounted from what it should actually be worth are:
On the other hand, perhaps I’m underestimating the risk of the FTC shutting the acquisition down. I read all the SEC filings and two or three legal analyses of the deal.
merger arbitrage itt
In Finland, Wolt’s contract with restaurants prohibits them to offer cheaper prices in b&m than in app. I don’t know how much this is enforced but food prices have skyrocketed during pandemic.